From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: "Stephen J. Turnbull" Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Emacs 23.4 Updated Windows Binaries published Date: Mon, 06 Feb 2012 14:22:29 +0900 Message-ID: <87fweozgbu.fsf@uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp> References: <4F2EAF8E.3010106@alice.it> <83d39tcjdx.fsf@gnu.org> <87haz4zksa.fsf@uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1328505773 4294 80.91.229.3 (6 Feb 2012 05:22:53 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 6 Feb 2012 05:22:53 +0000 (UTC) Cc: Eli Zaretskii , emacs-devel@gnu.org, Angelo Graziosi To: Lennart Borgman Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Mon Feb 06 06:22:51 2012 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([140.186.70.17]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1RuH2Q-0003Xg-5I for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 06 Feb 2012 06:22:50 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:36145 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1RuH2O-0000I2-Vt for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 06 Feb 2012 00:22:48 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.92]:35433) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1RuH2M-0000Hm-8P for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 06 Feb 2012 00:22:47 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1RuH2L-0007sE-7q for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 06 Feb 2012 00:22:46 -0500 Original-Received: from mgmt2.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp ([130.158.97.224]:32950) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1RuH2J-0007qc-2d; Mon, 06 Feb 2012 00:22:43 -0500 Original-Received: from uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp (uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp [130.158.99.156]) by mgmt2.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3E38F9707AB; Mon, 6 Feb 2012 14:22:30 +0900 (JST) Original-Received: by uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 0C1BF1A282A; Mon, 6 Feb 2012 14:22:30 +0900 (JST) In-Reply-To: X-Mailer: VM undefined under 21.5 (beta31) "ginger" e6b5c49f9e13 XEmacs Lucid (x86_64-unknown-linux) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6 (newer, 3) X-Received-From: 130.158.97.224 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:148239 Archived-At: Lennart Borgman writes: > On Mon, Feb 6, 2012 at 04:46, Stephen J. Turnbull w= rote: > > If you mean that Emacs doesn't need to distribute those sources > > *with Emacs*, that is true. =C2=A0If you mean that Emacs docs can > > point to the upstream sources, you misunderstand. >=20 > Stephen, can you please explain exactly what makes it not > permissible to point to the upstream sources? Eli answered this briefly already, but here's some additional detail and rationale. > You say below that it does not satisfy the GPL. Is that what you > mean? Almost. First, to the extent that the distributed code is under the GPL but not owned by the FSF, that's exactly right. Second, even if the additional library code is owned by the FSF, I consider that the FSF is morally (and perhaps legally by its charter and the assignment contracts it has entered) bound to provide that code on terms that allow third parties to easily redistribute Emacs exactly as they receive it, not to mention with their own modifications if they desire. Having to chase down sources on multiple hosts (some of which may no longer exist at the time you receive the code) is not my idea of fulfilling that obligation. I'm willing to go out on a limb and speak for Richard here: he would also find that unacceptable. > What does it break? It breaks Section 6d of the GNU General Public License, v3 (and the similar section in GPLv2, which is stricter): 6. Conveying Non-Source Forms. You may convey a covered work in object code form under the terms of sections 4 and 5, provided that you also convey the machine-readable Corresponding Source under the terms of this License, in one of these ways: d) Convey the object code by offering access from a designated place (gratis or for a charge), and offer equivalent access to the Corresponding Source in the same way through the same place at no further charge. Other parts of section 6 would also be broken in similar ways in case of "embedded Emacs" or "Emacs-on-a-disk" distribution. Note that even if Emacs can legally get around this requirement because the FSF owns all related code, anybody downstream from Emacs cannot. They must comply with the GPL in full, which (strictly speaking) means providing the exact copy of the Corresponding Sources that produced the binary they're distributing.